ArticleHealth promotion international2025
Little Aussie Bugs: piloting health literacy educational resources at Early Childhood Education and Care.
Article in Health promotion international, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Applying the Ottawa Charter to evaluate health literacy outcomes of the Little Aussie Bugs course for Australian early childhood educators.Health promotion international · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Building health literacy in early childhood is essential for lifelong health and underpins children's learning and developmental trajectories. This study assessed the efficacy of the Little Aussie Bugs books, designed to enhance health literacy in Australian Early Childhood Education and Care (ECEC) centres. The books, featuring inclusive characters and key health literacy catchphrases, were distributed to >1200 early learning settings Australia-wide. Exploratory research design used online surveys (n = 110) and in-depth interviews with ECEC teacher participants (n = 8) to determine the compatibility of the books with ECEC contexts and practices to facilitate the delivery of health literacy education. The findings were conceptualized through a socioecological lens, using the process, person, and context over time model. Participants reported high overall satisfaction with the books, alongside increased confidence to deliver health literacy messages. Key advantages included the dialogic nature of the books, children's familiarity with catchphrases and characters, and children's understanding of otherwise abstract concepts, such as 'invisible germs'. However, these benefits were limited for less experienced educators who may not have understood the dialogic nature of the books, subsequently not utilizing them to their full capacity. These limitations indicate the need for further support to accompany the resources and maximize their impact. Further research is planned to inform the design of effective and appropriate professional learning to complement the resources, supporting educators to optimize their use of the books and promoting sustained delivery of health literacy messaging in ECEC settings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.